Closes T2279
Details
Details
- Reviewers
anlambert - Group Reviewers
Reviewers - Maniphest Tasks
- T2279: Python client for the Web API
- Commits
- rDWCLIb921e2083f66: client.py: make docstring start with uppercase letters
rDWCLI0f8452d70c5c: tests: also test type-specific getters
rDWCLI064e9445b56a: pytest fixture: remove left-over debug print
rDWCLI51b3cbeeb944: requirements.txt: drop redundant dep on swh.core
rDWCLI2078a65154f8: client.py: move getters table for .get() to an instance variable
rDWCLI29cd8ab2d04d: web client tests: add missing copyright headers
rDWCLI56bc8c2358e1: Web API client: add tests
rDWCLI2d770633dc55: Web API client: first implementation
rDWCLI2f220cf5fbc3: set proper requirements.txt
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rDWCLI Web client
- Branch
- feature/client
- Lint
No Linters Available - Unit
No Unit Test Coverage - Build Status
Buildable 11220 Build 16944: tox-on-jenkins Jenkins Build 16943: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Build is green
See https://jenkins.softwareheritage.org/job/DWCLI/job/tox/1/ for more details.
Comment Actions
Build is green
See https://jenkins.softwareheritage.org/job/DWCLI/job/tox/2/ for more details.
Comment Actions
Build is green
See https://jenkins.softwareheritage.org/job/DWCLI/job/tox/3/ for more details.
Comment Actions
I have added a couple of inline comments that should be addressed before landing the client.
I noticed that only PIDS can be provided to the content, directory, revision, release and snapshot methods.
I imagine this is intended for validation purposes. But it could be great to also allow to pass hashes to these methods
as we can easily reconstruct the PIDS from them when we know the object type.
Also a nitpick: for consistency with the other swh modules docstrings, sentences should begin with an upper case letter.
Next step: add a CLI tool wrapping that web api client ?
| requirements-swh.txt | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2 | You can remove the swh.core dependency. | |
| swh/web/client/client.py | ||
| 176–189 | You could move that block in the class constructor and create a _getters instance variable. | |
| swh/web/client/tests/conftest.py | ||
| 23 | remaining debug output I guess | |
| swh/web/client/tests/test_web_api_client.py | ||
| 13 | You should also test web_api_client.content(pid) result. | |
| 25 | You should also test web_api_client.directory(pid) result. | |
| 39 | You should also test web_api_client.release(pid) result. | |
| 54 | You should also test web_api_client.revision(pid) result. | |
Comment Actions
- requirements.txt: drop redundant dep on swh.core
- client.py: move getters table for .get() to an instance variable
- pytest fixture: remove left-over debug print
- tests: also test type-specific getters
Comment Actions
Build is green
See https://jenkins.softwareheritage.org/job/DWCLI/job/tox/4/ for more details.
Comment Actions
Build is green
See https://jenkins.softwareheritage.org/job/DWCLI/job/tox/5/ for more details.
Comment Actions
Thanks for the great review !
All done, except for this point, which was indeed on purpose:
I noticed that only PIDS can be provided to the content, directory, revision, release and snapshot methods.
not really for validation purposes (although it clearly helps with that), but rather because a background idea here is to be future-proof, and already adopt a convention that we have on the roadmap for API v2, i.e., use PIDs (and only PIDs) everywhere.
| swh/web/client/client.py | ||
|---|---|---|
| 176–189 | good idea, it also allows to factor out the _get_snapshot() method, that might be useful elsewhere | |
| swh/web/client/tests/conftest.py | ||
| 23 | indeed, oops :-) | |
| swh/web/client/tests/test_web_api_client.py | ||
| 13 | right, I didn't want to duplicate test logic, but I think I've now found a way to test both ways of retrieving objects without doing so (same answer applies to all other comments like this one) | |
Comment Actions
not really for validation purposes (although it clearly helps with that), but rather because a background idea here is to be future-proof, and already adopt a convention that we have on the roadmap for API v2, i.e., use PIDs (and only PIDs) everywhere.
Ack, I was missing some context.
Otherwise, looks good to me !
| swh/web/client/tests/test_web_api_client.py | ||
|---|---|---|
| 38 | nice ! | |